C
5.6.1.1 states that mgt reviews "...shall include all requirements of the QMS and it's performance trends..."
To minimize the possibilty of process leaders adjusting the time period that their trends are based upon (in order to appear more favorable), our mgt review team has defined a trend as the current month plus the last three months. This definition is not rigidly applied because some indicators may need to reflect a longer time period in order to be effective. Those exceptions aside, generally we consider a trend during the last 3 to 4 months to be more indicative of our current perfomance and also allows us to react sooner to unfavorable situations. This works for us and we are flexible in it's application.
Altough our trends are typically based on this defined period, we maintain all historical data to facilitate more in depth analysis as needed and to comply with the requirement below.
The "Rules for achieving IATF recognition" (2nd Edition dated 31May04) states in Annex 1, "Stage 1 audit- Readiness review", first bullet point under the "What" column- "The organization shall provide the following documentation to the audit team for review, and for use in planning the audit.....including key indicators and peformance trends for the previous 12 months, minimum."
We interpret this to mean that we must have at least twelve months of data for our indicators and that this must be supplied to the CB for his/her preparation and review. Our auditor interprets this rule to mean that the trends that are presented and reviewed during Mgt Review must reflect a period of twelve months.
What say YOU?????
p.s. many may respond that the actual data takes precendence over the trend. We agree and always consider both in order to conduct a proper analysis. Nevertheless, one of our key system indicators is "% of indicators with a favorable trend". As such, specifying or standardizing the trend period is important to us. I have attached a graph for reference.
To minimize the possibilty of process leaders adjusting the time period that their trends are based upon (in order to appear more favorable), our mgt review team has defined a trend as the current month plus the last three months. This definition is not rigidly applied because some indicators may need to reflect a longer time period in order to be effective. Those exceptions aside, generally we consider a trend during the last 3 to 4 months to be more indicative of our current perfomance and also allows us to react sooner to unfavorable situations. This works for us and we are flexible in it's application.
Altough our trends are typically based on this defined period, we maintain all historical data to facilitate more in depth analysis as needed and to comply with the requirement below.
The "Rules for achieving IATF recognition" (2nd Edition dated 31May04) states in Annex 1, "Stage 1 audit- Readiness review", first bullet point under the "What" column- "The organization shall provide the following documentation to the audit team for review, and for use in planning the audit.....including key indicators and peformance trends for the previous 12 months, minimum."
We interpret this to mean that we must have at least twelve months of data for our indicators and that this must be supplied to the CB for his/her preparation and review. Our auditor interprets this rule to mean that the trends that are presented and reviewed during Mgt Review must reflect a period of twelve months.
What say YOU?????
p.s. many may respond that the actual data takes precendence over the trend. We agree and always consider both in order to conduct a proper analysis. Nevertheless, one of our key system indicators is "% of indicators with a favorable trend". As such, specifying or standardizing the trend period is important to us. I have attached a graph for reference.
Attachments
-
10.9 KB Views: 921

